MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Franklin Savings Bank ("FSB"), a creditor, filed a Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 10) (the "Motion") Glen Jordan's (the "Debtor") chapter 13 case. The Debtor objected (Doc. No. 20) (the "Objection"). FSB alleges that the Debtor filed his chapter 13 petition in bad faith after FSB had obtained relief from the automatic stay in the Debtor's previously filed — and still pending — chapter 7 case, and the Debtor's sole purpose...
MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it the Motion to Dismiss Adversary Proceeding (the "Motion") (Doc. No. 25) filed by Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (the "Bank"), and the Objection to Motion to Dismiss Complaint (the "Objection") (Doc. No. 26) filed by Debtor Plaintiff Melinda Ricketts (the "Debtor"). The Bank argues that the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 20) should be dismissed for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to...
Memorandum Opinion BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Chief Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This is the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint under Federal Rule of franchise agreement governing the relationship of the parties. The defendants also claim that the plaintiff has brought this suit in the wrong forum. The plaintiff responds with an attempt to undermine the franchise agreement as a whole. He argues that the defendants procured the agreement by fraud and that the agreement is itself is...
MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Chief Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it the Motion of Nicholas Mercier to Intervene (Doc. No. 101) pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 1109(b) and Bankruptcy Rule 2018(a), as well his Motion to Alter or Amend pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9023. Mercier seeks status as a party in interest in order to assert the Motion to Alter or Amend. If permitted to intervene, Mercier asks the Court to alter its June 21, 2013 order declining to retroactively...
MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before Court on the debtors' Objection to Claim 2 (Doc. No. 67) (the "Objection"). In the Objection, debtor Ralph R. Perry (the "Debtor"), contests whether the claimant, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement Division ("MDOR"), is entitled to $13,932.39 1 in past due child support, which MDOR contends was due between March 2008 and March 2009. 2 For the reasons set forth below,...
MEMORANDUM OPINION J. MICHAEL DEASY, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION Debtors Isaacson Steel Inc. and Isaacson Structural Steel Inc. (the "Debtors") have entered into a settlement agreement with their largest creditors, Passumpsic Savings Bank ("Passumpsic), Turner Construction Company, Inc. ("Turner"), the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority (the "BFA"), and with the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the "Committee") (collectively, the "Settlement Proponents"). The Motion to...
MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Chief Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it Claim 5-4, in which the United States Department of Agriculture (the "USDA") claims entitlement to a $16,962.18 administrative expense pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 503(b) and 507(a)(2). The chapter 7 trustee objects to the allowance of this priority claim. For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that the $16,962.18 claim is not allowable as an administrative expense and should be disallowed...
MEMORANDUM OPINION BRUCE A. HARWOOD, Chief Judge. Introduction The Court has before it the Amended Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 39) and Amended Motion for Relief from the Automatic Stay (Doc. No. 40) filed by creditor TD Bank, N.A. ("TD Bank" or the "Bank"), as well as the Motion for Contempt for Willful Violation of the Automatic Stay (Doc. No. 30) filed by PM Cross, LLC ("PM Cross" or the "Debtor"). By its twin motions, TD Bank has asserted a number of claims, which boil down to two...
MEMORANDUM OPINION J. MICHAEL DEASY, Bankruptcy Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The Court has before it the Debtors' Motion to Reconsider (Doc. No. 45) (the "Motion") filed on March 20, 2013. The Motion requests that the Court reconsider its March 14, 2013 Order (Doc. No. 39) (the "Order"), which denied the Debtors' Motion to Enlarge Time Period to File Proof of Claim (Doc. No. 35) (the "Enlargement Motion"). The Court denied the Enlargement Motion on the grounds that, pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. ("...
